Hasn't stopped you in your one-sided moderation of me Vic
I know I shouldn't but let me try one more time.
I think that we need to have a look at what is meant by 'insults'. Let's make it simple by restricting ourselves to these most recent exchanges between Bryan and Jim. Now we know their attitudes are miles apart an that there is not much likelihood of them agreeing on this subject, and others for that matter
I have pointed out the Bryan has been pretty heated in his comments, but to my mind he stays the right side of the line.
Now let's look at the post at 14 Feb 18 - 07:33 PM. If two sentences were removed, I would say that the post was acceptable. However, look at these two questions:-
What are you people on Bryan?
What kind of sick behaviour is this?
It is these unnecessary interjections that spoil things. The first suggests that he (and unspecified others) are drug takers. The second implies that some unpleasant mental attitudes or conditions are involved. These false derogatory jibes do not put you in a good light and detract from the power of the case that you are making.
It is this constrant drip of defamatory comments that throw a smokescreen over understanding the points that you are trying to put over.
You say that you object to my "one-sided moderation" of your comments. I would really like you to see that this is because you are by far the main perpetrator. Time and again these rude barbs appear in your posts.
In recent posts you have mentioned being asked to give presentations at Irish universities and of writing a critique of The Critics Group (a difficult task for anyone I would think). How did you express yourself in those situations? If differently, then why?
Earlier in the thread you were advised by someone to check what you have written before clicking "Submit message" and it was very good advice.